|
Post by quetee on Sept 21, 2022 16:30:29 GMT
The one time Tiffany Trump is glad her dad never liked her.
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Sept 21, 2022 16:51:29 GMT
Alright hurry up and put his ass in jail
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Sept 21, 2022 17:31:01 GMT
Here's hoping all these constant legal headaches give him a heart attack.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 21, 2022 18:01:36 GMT
Alright hurry up and put his ass in jail No jail time involved in the suit.
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Sept 21, 2022 18:07:02 GMT
Alright hurry up and put his ass in jail No jail time involved in the suit. yeah isn't it like $250 million? Trump could raise that in a week from donations to his PAC and his grassroots army of MAGA crazies. People would sacrifice their firstborn children for this guy if he asked. The DOJ investigation is much more interesting but who knows how far that goes in a MAGA-packed judicial landscape. Legally he doesn't have a leg to stand on but his lawyers and judges can just write the rules as they go.
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Sept 21, 2022 20:55:02 GMT
Alright hurry up and put his ass in jail No jail time involved in the suit. There’s still the Mar-a-Lago stuff that could put him away! Unrelated to this I know, but it’s something
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Sept 21, 2022 20:56:00 GMT
No jail time involved in the suit. yeah isn't it like $250 million? Trump could raise that in a week from donations to his PAC and his grassroots army of MAGA crazies. People would sacrifice their firstborn children for this guy if he asked. The DOJ investigation is much more interesting but who knows how far that goes in a MAGA-packed judicial landscape. Legally he doesn't have a leg to stand on but his lawyers and judges can just write the rules as they go. Bruh Trump really about to get his supporters to pay off his lawsuit for him
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 21, 2022 21:06:51 GMT
No jail time involved in the suit. There’s still the Mar-a-Lago stuff that could put him away! Unrelated to this I know, but it’s something Yes for stealing documents, but not for the civil suit. Trump is in deep trouble. Historians are never going to see him in a positive light. The case for him going lower grows higher.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 21, 2022 22:13:25 GMT
There’s still the Mar-a-Lago stuff that could put him away! Unrelated to this I know, but it’s something Yes for stealing documents, but not for the civil suit. Trump is in deep trouble. Historians are never going to see him in a positive light. The case for him going lower grows higher. Trump cares big time what history says about him. His ego is crushed at this point. He only wanted to be president again in order to avoid prosecution.
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 22, 2022 0:17:54 GMT
There’s still the Mar-a-Lago stuff that could put him away! Unrelated to this I know, but it’s something Yes for stealing documents, but not for the civil suit. Trump is in deep trouble. Historians are never going to see him in a positive light. The case for him going lower grows higher. Except for Lincoln historians dont care about President who ruled over 100 years ago. And in 100 years none will care about Trump, Obama, The Clintons, The Bushes or Biden. All will smell as naftaline
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 22, 2022 0:50:49 GMT
Yes for stealing documents, but not for the civil suit. Trump is in deep trouble. Historians are never going to see him in a positive light. The case for him going lower grows higher. Except for Lincoln historians dont care about President who ruled over 100 years ago. And in 100 years none will care about Trump, Obama, The Clintons, The Bushes or Biden. All will smell as naftaline You do understand that CSPAN and Marist ask historians to rank all the presidents from best to worst? That's all of them. Every 2 to 4 years, there are new rankings. Currently historians have Buchanan as the worst, followed by (Andrew) Johnson, and then Trump and Pierce are tied for the third to worst.
Obama is seen as one of the best presidents of all-time. Currently #10.
What you wrote above is contrary to reality.
I fully expect Trump to move down on that list.
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 22, 2022 1:47:38 GMT
Except for Lincoln historians dont care about President who ruled over 100 years ago. And in 100 years none will care about Trump, Obama, The Clintons, The Bushes or Biden. All will smell as naftaline You do understand that CSPAN and Marist ask historians to rank all the presidents from best to worst? That's all of them. Every 2 to 4 years, there are new rankings. Currently historians have Buchanan as the worst, followed by (Andrew) Johnson, and then Trump and Pierce are tied for the third to worst.
Obama is seen as one of the best presidents of all-time. Currently #10.
What you wrote above is contrary to reality.
I fully expect Trump to move down on that list.
And maybe half of the "historians" work for the Obama Administration. Cost almost 40 years to start to taken seriously Reagan Presidency. And in 20 years he will rank higher esteem. Because he was damn good President.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 22, 2022 2:03:03 GMT
You do understand that CSPAN and Marist ask historians to rank all the presidents from best to worst? That's all of them. Every 2 to 4 years, there are new rankings. Currently historians have Buchanan as the worst, followed by (Andrew) Johnson, and then Trump and Pierce are tied for the third to worst.
Obama is seen as one of the best presidents of all-time. Currently #10.
What you wrote above is contrary to reality.
I fully expect Trump to move down on that list.
And maybe half of the "historians" work for the Obama Administration. Cost almost 40 years to start to taken seriously Reagan Presidency. And in 20 years he will rank higher esteem. Because he was damn good President. The survey asks presidential historians from across the political spectrum.
You're probably unaware that Reagan was ranked #9 on the survey. Care to present your evidence that these historians are Obama plants?
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 22, 2022 12:28:37 GMT
And maybe half of the "historians" work for the Obama Administration. Cost almost 40 years to start to taken seriously Reagan Presidency. And in 20 years he will rank higher esteem. Because he was damn good President. You truly are uninformed here. The survey asks presidential historians from across the political spectrum. The commentary speaks volumes on how little you understand how these things work. I mean, you did dodge my question about ranked voting and thought that Jane Roe changed her mind on abortion.
You're probably unaware that Reagan was ranked #9 on the survey. Care to present your evidence that these historians are Obama plants?
Its exactly what I post. Reagan every year (there will be some exceptions tha dont break the rule) will rank higher. Beyond his charismatic persona, what the hell Obama made to América?. Prosperity? C Infrastructure? World agreements that beneficiated US? Or chaos in middle East, chaos in Latinamerica and agreements with Dictatorships like Cuba, China or Irán? And of course a real state bubble that explote badly (even when that was not completely his fault)
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 22, 2022 13:31:44 GMT
You truly are uninformed here. The survey asks presidential historians from across the political spectrum. The commentary speaks volumes on how little you understand how these things work. I mean, you did dodge my question about ranked voting and thought that Jane Roe changed her mind on abortion.
You're probably unaware that Reagan was ranked #9 on the survey. Care to present your evidence that these historians are Obama plants?
Its exactly what I post. Reagan every year (there will be some exceptions tha dont break the rule) will rank higher. Beyond his charismatic persona, what the hell Obama made to América?. Prosperity? C Infrastructure? World agreements that beneficiated US? Or chaos in middle East, chaos in Latinamerica and agreements with Dictatorships like Cuba, China or Irán? And of course a real state bubble that explote badly (even when that was not completely his fault) Do you care to prove your Obama plant theory or that the historians surveyed aren’t real? Reagan was always ranked high.
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 22, 2022 14:24:55 GMT
I predict than in 50 years Obama will be ran lower. If there are still people that make this kind of polls. There is an urban legend the History Class in England end 100 years before the time of scholars-
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 22, 2022 23:57:24 GMT
I predict than in 50 years Obama will be ran lower. If there are still people that make this kind of polls. There is an urban legend the History Class in England end 100 years before the time of scholars- In 50 years, Trump will still be seen as one of the worst. Things keep on getting worse for Trump. You cannot deny this fact. Obama may slip in rankings, but he still made a positive mark on our country - First Pro-LGBTQ president, he got Osama Bin Laden, ACA and got us out of the one of the worst recessions in American history. Trump is going to be seen as one of the most ineffective and corrupt Presidents.
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 23, 2022 0:07:04 GMT
I predict than in 50 years Obama will be ran lower. If there are still people that make this kind of polls. There is an urban legend the History Class in England end 100 years before the time of scholars- In 50 years, Trump will still be seen as one of the worst. Things keep on getting worse for Trump. You cannot deny this fact. Obama may slip in rankings, but he still made a positive mark on our country - First Pro-LGBTQ president, he got Osama Bin Laden, ACA and got us out of the one of the worst recessions in American history. Trump is going to be seen as one of the most ineffective and corrupt Presidents. I hope both will be Alive in 50 years to bet for at least $ 5.000 . But Obama will not be as high and Trump as low. Unless one of Obama or Trump children or grandchildren become President of US, very unlikely thing. That is the only thing that could push both from.averagr. Thats work for Ted Roosevelt, without that maldito lisiado (quote from a mexican soap opera) nephew gave that horrible human being of Teddy would shade into ostracism.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Sept 23, 2022 1:51:23 GMT
In 50 years, Trump will still be seen as one of the worst. Things keep on getting worse for Trump. You cannot deny this fact. Obama may slip in rankings, but he still made a positive mark on our country - First Pro-LGBTQ president, he got Osama Bin Laden, ACA and got us out of the one of the worst recessions in American history. Trump is going to be seen as one of the most ineffective and corrupt Presidents. I hope both will be Alive in 50 years to bet for at least $ 5.000 . But Obama will not be as high and Trump as low. Unless one of Obama or Trump children or grandchildren become President of US, very unlikely thing. That is the only thing that could push both from.averagr. Thats work for Ted Roosevelt, without that maldito lisiado (quote from a mexican soap opera) nephew gave that horrible human being of Teddy would shade into ostracism. Are you betting $5,000 that Trump will be alive in 50 years? 'Cause I'll take that bet.
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Sept 23, 2022 2:13:07 GMT
I hope both will be Alive in 50 years to bet for at least $ 5.000 . But Obama will not be as high and Trump as low. Unless one of Obama or Trump children or grandchildren become President of US, very unlikely thing. That is the only thing that could push both from.averagr. Thats work for Ted Roosevelt, without that maldito lisiado (quote from a mexican soap opera) nephew gave that horrible human being of Teddy would shade into ostracism. Are you betting $5,000 that Trump will be alive in 50 years? 'Cause I'll take that bet. Lol. No the bet is that if brother fease and Im we are alive to analizate The places of Obama and Trump. Unless Trump finds Walt Disney igloo criogenic chamera. Its imposible!!!
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Sept 23, 2022 2:51:41 GMT
Nahhhh Hugo’s got a point. These historians are absolutely Obama stooges or at the very least they just have it out for trump and are letting it affect their judgment. They try to make it look legitimate by putting Buchanan and Johnson at the bottom where they belong (Johnson should be ranked worse than Buchanan tho, that’s the tell). You can’t seriously tell me Trump was worse than Warren G. Harding or Franklin Pierce. At least Trump’s about 10-15 spots from where he should actually be tho. Putting Obama in the top 10 is so insanely disconnected from reality. It is straight up delusional. I can not take you seriously as a historian if you’re unironically putting Obama in your top 10 US presidents ever. He belongs in the same tier as Trump. Obama expanded on all the worst policies of the Bush presidency and is directly responsible for creating the environment where it was possible for someone like Trump to become president. That’s Obama’s legacy - Donald Trump. Obama has the single worst legacy of any president since Woodrow Wilson A lot of it also definitely has to be recency bias I guess. It’s why I don’t like ranking modern presidents, it’s hard to judge it fairly and it takes time to assess the effect they had on the country. I mean the latest edition is already trying to rank the Biden presidency and they put him at #19 ffs. 10-15 years after they leave office sounds about right for when you can start to fairly rank them with the rest. The most recent president that I think can be judged fairly is Dubya and, admittedly, 35 sounds about right which is what the latest edition has him at. I know I just wrote a whole paragraph about not ranking modern presidents but Dubya and Obama belong right next to each other in that mid 30s range. No, really, those two should go back to back in that mid 30s range. Idk which one should get the bragging rights and be ranked higher. Doesn’t matter, Dubya’s the right asscheek and Obama the left one. And yes, that makes Trump the asshole. I know some of you who are actually reading this wall of text were drawing up that quip in your minds, you’re not clever And no, Hugo, Reagan isn’t getting ranked higher or consolidating in the top 10. He just dropped from 9 to 18, which is actually also a bit fair tbh. His presidency hasn’t aged well. The way I see it, great president during his time but that’s the thing - a lot his policies, which were effective for the time, have outlasted him and it results in his legacy getting worse with each passing year. I still think it’s reasonable to put him near the top 10 tho. Not because he’s really great or anything, I just have a hard time naming 10 good US presidents which means being mediocre, or just a little bit bad instead of bad, is enough to get you a high ranking. In another thread I compared the quality of US presidents to that of Roman emperors. It is very top heavy. You got maybe a dozen great emperors and then when you look at the other hundred or so it gets really ugly. In terms of great US presidents, you got the guys on Mount Rushmore and then after that…
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 23, 2022 6:09:10 GMT
I don't get the historian thing myself anyway - I mean what is the suggestion there that they're "historians" so they are "experts" without a political bias themselves? Nah.....it's like if a group of "film critics (or "historians")" say something - it's nice, I might read it and contemplate it, but whatever........move on from it don't reference it like it's "fact" Reagan regardless of what I think of him (don't think much of him, and don't think of him much either) ended the Cold War - now did he "really" - no ....... but Presidents get credit for what happened during their time so take the L there - he gets credit for that. Appointed the first female SCOTUS because when Republicans aren't advancing women's rights, they are ending slavery ammiright?, he won 49 states iirc...got the country out of worse recession than Obama did cause by a Worst Of All Time contender Jimmy Carter......just saying.....America loved Reagan ..... At some point you have to look at how the people feel - I wouldn't piss on Trump if he was on fire - but he funded 0 wars, the economy was great until Covid - and while his Covid response was abysmal - it was extenuating circumstances to say the least.........he defined the Court for generations (rightly or wrongly), got more Republican votes than any dude, ever - twice - and people would die for him - literally - which has to mean something at least.....I mean nobody would have died for Millard Fillmore ammiright? ......most 1 term Presidents blow, Trump sure blew, Biden after 2 years to me comparably blows, Reagan like him or not (I don't) was era defining in exactly the way Obama was - moreso actually his reign extended to Bush #1's term - and Obama has similar lasting negative effects like Reagan too .........but historians are just another voice....... not THE voice.......or the ONLY voice......and also come to think of it......fnck Millard Fillmore
|
|
flasuss
Badass
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 1,615
|
Post by flasuss on Sept 23, 2022 10:00:51 GMT
The fact that Reagan was era defining counts against, not for him. He was the one that gave a kick in the nuts to the separation between religion and politics, pushed forward the idea that massive tax cuts to the rich benefits the poor for...reasons, and that caring for the environment is for pussies. And before anyone accuses me of being some crazy liberal or whatever, yes, Obama being in the top 10 is a joke. His administration was pure mediocrity.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 23, 2022 10:51:00 GMT
Nahhhh Hugo’s got a point. These historians are absolutely Obama stooges or at the very least they just have it out for trump and are letting it affect their judgment. They try to make it look legitimate by putting Buchanan and Johnson at the bottom where they belong (Johnson should be ranked worse than Buchanan tho, that’s the tell). You can’t seriously tell me Trump was worse than Warren G. Harding or Franklin Pierce. No, Hugo doesn't have a point. Show me any evidence the historians aren't really historians or that they are somehow "Obama stooges". What you posted here is complete and utter nonsense here. I am trying to be as nice as possible.
Warren G. Harding didn't do anything seriously wrong. He died two years into his presidency. The only thing he did which was wrong at the time was drink and gamble at the White House. His reputation only took a dive AFTER he passed away. He is ranked low because of what his staff did. Not he himself. Basically the criticism was that he turned a blind eye to corruption.
Trump was a pretty terrible president - low poll numbers, cruel immigration policies, fought against protecting LGBTQ workers from discrimination, botched COVID-19 response, engaged in undercover relations with the Russian Government, got impeached twice and now you can add stealing documents to the long list of failures.
Trump being on the bottom is a no-brainer.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Fease on Sept 23, 2022 11:01:02 GMT
I don't get the historian thing myself anyway - I mean what is the suggestion there that they're "historians" so they are "experts" without a political bias themselves? Nah.....it's like if a group of "film critics (or "historians")" say something - it's nice, I might read it and contemplate it, but whatever........move on from it don't reference it like it's "fact" I think you need to do research before posting what you posted. We have presidential historians across our country. They work for different presidential historian societies. They are asked to fill out a survey and are asked to rank based on certain criteria. The purpose is to show how perceptions of presidents change or not change over time. For example, when Ike and Truman left office, they were unpopular. Now they are seen as a top 10 president.
I'll give you an example of a historian get entries into these surveys: Amity Shlaes. She's a conservative author and member of the Calvin Coolidge society.
Certainly these are "opinions" but based on opinions from people have actually studied the presidents closely and are informed citizens.
The only positive thing about Trump being ranked 3rd to 4th from bottom, is that he can't go much lower. We saw George W. Bush at the "dumpfire tier", but now he's moving up toward the middle of the pack. Being out of office has raised his respectability. Obama just might shade a bit over time or he might move upward. Obama has always been a popular figure.
|
|